Frisky Dingo

The Scion brand dying is really a shame. And it's a shame because of what it could have been. Toyota had an opportunity here to throw whatever crazy car they wanted on the market, and if flopped, shrug their shoulders and say, "Who cares?!?" And they totally squandered it. Instead of being an outlet for goofy, risky, out-there automotive ideas, they became just another brand under the Toyota umbrella that was ruled by bean counters and conservative thought. The problem with Scion was that they were afraid of their own success. When they came out with the xB and it proved to be wildly successful, they started overthinking things. They started applying their Toyota mentality to the Scion brand. They became worried about sales numbers and the success of their models, and that led to safe calls with mediocre vehicles that didn't break any new grounds on the design, packaging, value, etc fronts. They basically just started making vehicles that could have been Toyotas. Which leads us to today. For the last several years, having the Scion brand was a waste. You had no vehicles that were unorthodox or unconventional in the lineup, which was what the brand was for in the first place. And all the vehicles they did have would have been better served as Toyotas. Instead, it just limited the sales and exposure of those vehicles, and at least in the case of FR-S, prevented an improvement of Toyota's image. The death of Scion happened as soon as the second generation wave of products arrived. I own a 2005 Scion xB, and people can talk trash about it and the brand all they want, but it is a brilliant little car. Unapologetically functional, efficient, well-built, affordable, reliable, unconventional in style. It was so square (pun intended) it was cool. It is such an obviously un-American car. It actually has good torque for city driving, it rides fairly well, it gets almost 30mpg in town, it has good steering, it is impossibly roomy inside, it does awesome in snow, and the thing will last to 400,000 miles with just basic maintenance. And the crazy thing is, after 11 years and 130,00 miles, it's still worth almost half of it's original MSRP. I'll never get rid of the thing, I love it. Ultimately, the writing was on the wall for this brand a long time ago. Just one more casualty in the name of homogeneous autodom.

Very curious to see the 1LE. Hopefully it'll reignite my hopes of buying a 6th gen.

Double post.

Yeah, my current stance on the matter is I wouldn't be interested in buying one until at least the 1LE comes along.

We got our first Camaro in yesterday, a Nightfall Gray over Kalahari 8AT 2SS w/ no options. Suffice to say, after all the reviews and positive press, I've been dying to drive one. And I'm happy that we got an SS in as our first car. Of course, I would have loved for it to have been a manual, but I'll take what I can get. More on that in a minute. Starting with the outside, pictures don't do this car justice. Not to how good it looks in the first place, or even how different from the 5th Gen car it looks. There are much more sophisticated design elements at work here than it's predecessor. Think of it as the old design shrunk down to 9/10's, pulled taught over it's skeleton, with more surface detailing and intersecting body lines tossed in for good measure. The front looks fantastic, it's my favorite view of the car. Next up is side profile, which really highlights the new lines. The rear is definitely my least favorite. It just comes off as a little too abrupt, and I'm not a fan of the rear wing. The inside is a radical departure from the old car, and it's much better for it. Nicely finished and put together panels replace hard, coarse, low-rent plastic. The air vents which double as temp control dials are a great touch. The whole center stack is really nice. Simple, well-laid out, easy-to-use. I don't like the steering wheel that much. The rim itself is great- nice diameter, meaty, shaped right for driving- but the design of the center section is pretty bad. It's like they looked to Aston Martin for inspiration here. Seats are great. They offer good adjustment and support, and are sized right. It was easy to find a comfortable position. What we all want to know about is the drive, though. It is, after all, what this car is all about. Well, on that front, it drives great. But it didn't wow me, truth be told. I don't know if my expectations were too high, or the 8AT took too much away from the experience, or what. But it just didn't get the endorphins rushing. Let me clear and state all the things the car does right. The steering is very good. There is absolutely no slop, and it is marksman accurate. It could use a tad less weight, and a dollop more of feel, however. It handles fantastic. It turns in sharp, handles flat, and takes elevation and pavement changes alike with total aplomb. You'd really have to do something hamfisted to upset this car's chassis. It's just extremely well controlled and buttoned down. It brakes hard, with good, not great, pedal feel. It accelerates even harder, feeling every bit as strong as I recall the Z/28 being. And it all comes together in one very cohesive package. After several miles of twisty two-lane roads, however, it never really lit my fire. I know at least a substantial part of that was the trans. This was my best drive of it in a sporty application so far, and I don't care what the press releases or GM fanboys will have you believe, it is just NOT as good as dual clutch auto setups from BMW, Audi, Porsche, and the like. It's fine left to it's devices in Drive. And even it Sport Mode using the paddles, it offers quick, snappy upshifts under hard acceleration. Under part throttle, though, it's not as crisp. And on downshifts, the gulf between it and the aforementioned transmissions really becomes apparent. It just doesn't get down through the gears near as quickly or neatly. I absolutely could not buy this car in auto form. I am sure the 7MT is a tremendously more fun option. But I'm still not convinced that will elevate the car to the status I had in mind going into the drive. Besides that 8AT, the visibility is still a strike. It's better, but it's still not great. The two humps of the pod the instrument panel are set in, in particular, are a detriment to your view of the road. It's not a terrible offense, but these are the kinds of things that separate great sports cars from merely good ones. The other complaint I have is the feeling of mass. While this car feels notably smaller and easier to place than the old car, there is still a feeling of mass in it's moves that saps a little bit of satisfaction. It really didn't feel any lighter than the new Mustang GT I drove. In fact, apart from the Camaro feeling much, much quicker, I didn't really find the car that much more enjoyable to drive than the Ford. It almost feels too friendly. I love the added refinement, but I can't help but feel like a little character was lost in the process. In comparison to that 5th Gen Z/28 I mentioned earlier, that car is immensely more fun to drive. Almost more than I can put into words. I would happily take the shortcomings of the old car's interior for that 'on-the-starting-block-waiting-for-the-pistol' demeanor combined with it's unabashed American attitude and glowing charisma. I was expecting a drive of the new SS to cement my desires to buy one, but unless I get a go at the manual car, and it radically changes my opinion, that is no longer the case. I would rather spend the same money on an older ZL1 or SS sedan, or spend a little more and get an old Z/28. It's a high-water mark for the Pony Car game, but not a high water mark for personal driving experiences.

And nothing of value was lost.....

I still say they shouldn't have bothered with the 2.0T. I'm liking this car more and more, though.

I plan on going to LeMans to watch the 24hr before I die. It's an incredible experience from what I hear.

Can't wait for the 24hr Daytona!! Also, the new CT6 is really growing on me. The side profile is fantastic and darker colors really do this car well. I'm starting to actually like the philosophy behind it more, as well. I look forward to seeing more on it.

Touching on the looks of the Malibu, there are two oddities I notice- One, and I think I mentioned this in my 1.5 review, the bottom of the front bumper and the bottom of the rocker panels don't align. Kinda bugs me. The other thing is that when viewed from the side, the deck lid can appear a bit too abbreviated. Darker colors definitely do it more justice, however. We've got one of the metallic gray ones now, and it looks great.

I saw that like 36 people died in the NE from blizzard conditions. If you die in 2016 from cold weather, I kinda can't help but feel like that's Darwinism at work.

I haven't driven the new WRX, but a stint in the new STI not to long ago left me rather disappointed. The car felt and drove decidedly old-school, and I don't mean that in a good way. No way could I justify the cost of one. I'd like to try the regular WRX out and see if that FA20 improves the feel of the car. The STI felt fine, if it were a 10 year old car.

Dude, you are the only one dragging this on. We've already changed the subject. GM vehicles are no more reliable than Toyota products. If you want to deny that in your narrow-minded little head, be my guest. Just give it a rest.

He called me out on a statement first, and I'M the one lashing out? Please. GTFO here and stop whining.

Wranglers are great if you can use them in the capacity they are intended. They are terrible to drive on the street on a regular basis, though. Even my 4Runner was archaic and antiquated enough, and it's far better to drive than a Wrangler. Next time I get a vehicle for wheeling, it's gonna be an FJ or bust for me.

Your GIF didn't work, but my imagination is doing a good enough job, because I know how bad most white people dance. * I am a white person. Jeep Wranglers being one of those vehicles I was referring to.

Look, I'm not here to debate which is better between Toyota and GM. Contrary to popular belief, I like GM a lot. They're one of my favorite makers. That doesn't mean I'm going to ignore their drawbacks or weaknesses. And one of those is, with modern cars and CUV's, lack of reliability and engineering flaws. Sorry, it is what it is. Toyota has plenty of room for criticism. Majority of their products are dull, uninspired, and outdated. But reliability, especially among Tacomas of the last ~10 years, is stellar. This is reflected in their resale value that is matched by only a select few vehicles on the market, some of which being fellow Toyota products.

Not worse reliabilty... Toyota AT BEST, is at least ON PAR...with GM over the years...tally up all the late 1950s and early 1960s Toyopets, to which they were ran OUT OF THE CONTINENT and all the rust buckets that Toyota sold all through the 1970s...and some of the shyte they sold in the 1980s and then all the recalled crap they sold ALL THROUGH THE 2000s and 2010s...and you know what, Frisky? Ill change my tune and say that Toyota is DEFINITELY SHYTTIER than General Motors ever was... Hmm, it's just too bad we're not talking about cars from the 50's and 60's.

Knocking a certain brand for lack of reliability while trying to purchase a product from a brand that has worse reliability is hypocrisy. Do you need me to provide you with a link to Webster's?

First off, my last post wasn't even directed at you, it was for Surreal. Secondly, I don't ever bring up GM's 80's and 90's products. I challenge you to find a single instance where I have done that. I also don't lambaste anyone for liking GM. You can like whatever you want, makes me no difference. I give Toyota just as criticism as I do GM. Easily. There are few brands I criticize LESS than GM, at least from a product standpoint. Another poster made it a point to throw Toyota's recalls out there as being merit to arguing Toyota isn't reliable. We all know that is far form the truth. This same poster also recently posted about searching for a vehicle, but having a very specific set of criteria. Those criteria are limited to vehicles that were, generally speaking, known for their unreliability. Therefore, his statement was hypocritical. I do not make hypocritical statements. If I did, I would say something along the lines of GM products being boring to drive, even though they are, as a whole, more engaging to drive than Toyota competition and they have more enthusiast-geared options. Maybe you should see how adamantly I defended the new Malibu over at Bimmerforums.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. You asked, I answered. Let it rest. You hate Toyota and love GM, just like 90% of the posters here. Moving on.....

At some point, after recalling 50 million vehicles for assembly & design deficiencies in a decade's time -some grotesquely glaring- the adjective 'reliable' becomes gravely inappropriate. Says the guy looking for a sub-10K domestic SUV/CUV. And what does that have to do with his statement at all? Well, he brought up recalls by a company that first off, sells/has sold significantly more cars across the globe than GM, and which were by and large, for minor things that don't affect drivability. Conversely, GM has been wrought with recalls itself lately, and they are of much more severity than Toyota's. In other words, it's a hypocritical statement.

At some point, after recalling 50 million vehicles for assembly & design deficiencies in a decade's time -some grotesquely glaring- the adjective 'reliable' becomes gravely inappropriate. Says the guy looking for a sub-10K domestic SUV/CUV.

Well, I just hope you realize that numerous nonprofit outfits use Toyotas to reach areas that are far outside of modern civilization for positive reasons. Medical specialists delivering supplies and care to villages that don't have access to healthcare. Conservation units that actively patrol wildlife preserves to protect endangered species from poachers. So on and so forth. The very traits that makes so great as tools for warfare make them great for good things, as well.

Coming from someone with a military background, I can tell you that wouldn't work for several reasons. Chief among them would be that the role such a vehicle would serve would be very limited in scope and usability. As tough as a Raptor is, it would require significant outfitting and upgrading to handle the demands of combat use. Even HUMVEEs with heavy up-armoring kits were still highly susceptible to blasts from below- land mines, IEDs- and penetrating explosives such as RPGs. This was with thousands of pounds of armor added, creating vehicles that weighed in @ 4 tons or more. A Raptor would even moderate armor upfitting would offer little protection to numerous combat dangers. Next up you'd have the logistical issues of supply and running costs. Ford most likely couldn't even produce the Raptor in numbers significant enough for the military to really be able to utilize and justify the procurement of them. And maintenance costs would be extreme. A thirsty, performance-tuned, forced induction, small displacement gas engine operating in a military theater would be major expense and offer much greater liability that a diesel platform. Military personnel carriers, even in their most basic and lightest configurations have evolved into a much tougher and safer animal. The opening engagements of Afghanistan and Iraq in recent times made it abundantly clear that unarmored vehicles cannot safely transport troops or material. There are Special Forces divisions that actually use Toyota Tacomas already, and they offer abilities that larger vehicles cannot. They allow for quick, low-key insertion of operators into an area and then extraction back out. They are extremely reliable and tough, especially relative to their cost, and they don't make as much of a statement as a large, full-size truck would. They essentially give up armor and payload in exchange for simplicity and stealth. Raptors COULD, provided the aforementioned supply could be met, conceivably function as behind-front lines support vehicles, expeditionary and recon platforms, and as transports in Stateside and peace area roles such as Security Forces, to and from missile/radar sites, and in War Game exercises which take place in challenging terrain but don't require safety measures like a combat vehicle. I thought these types of people loved their Toyotas Add another reason to a long list as to why I HATE Toyota... You hate Toyotas because they are tremendously capable, rugged, and reliable vehicles? Makes sense.